You will as many opinions as there are cam choices is the problem.

I had a smaller cam, 222/238 both XER lobes 14+4, originally and it lacked up top, dyno and dragstrip scans showed the same thing, lacked power above 5600 rpm's.

My new cam, 234/246, has been street tuned only so far, winter came so fun is over. It is much better up top and I don't feel like I lost any mid range. It made more power, injector duty cycle went from 80% to 97% so the injectors had to be upgraded, it does not show the flat lazy curve above 5600 like the old setup either. Spring will tell the whole story.

Driveabilty is very good, no bad surging, small amount with torque cinverter locker at 1600 rpms and 46 mph, I will fix that in the next tune and idles good at 800 rpms.

Geoff Skinner @ www.engpwrsys.com spec'd it and they are his proprietary Comp Cams lobes. Very quiet valve train. A lot better than the XER lobes.

234/246
.602/.606
114+3

Hope this helps. You could just get the LG G6X3, it seems to work really good on the LS3 engines. Specs are top secret.

 

I have a 408 with ported LS3 heads and I had a single plane carb style intake on it with a 230/240 cam. It never pulled good times at the track and looking at the scanner logs it looked like it would just lay down up top. I finaly removed the carb style intake with the Edelbrock ultra low profile elbow and installed a new STOCK LS3 intake. I do my own tuning, and with this manifold it was easier to tune and it drives quite a bit better. It still seams to be missing something on the top end though. I have sense installed a GT-88 rear mount turbo to make the top end power. Now I am thinking of going to a smaller cam to help the low end power and help with the turbo lag. Looking at the data in this thread makes me wonder if the GT11 Lingenfelter cam would be a wise choice or if I should be looking for something completly different due to the turbo.

 

Anyone else with new LS3 cam experiences?

 

On the Corvette forum there is a thread titled "Helpful research to help you find the perfect LS3 Cam" which is chock full of great information and data.

 

LOL I think he is in that thread

 

The funniest thing about all of the cam threads on the corvette forum is that there is only 1 person who specs cams, Spinmonster.

The big boys, LG and others start their own threads to show how good their cams work but it always comes back to "Spin said that won't work" or "you have to use this and that will never work".

People whine about LS1tech but at least there is a broader choice for information and not just one persons opinion.

 

there is a thread on HCLS1 in the dyno section,i think, with some good info this subject..

 

your talking to the wrong people then..i use to think Mustang guys were a bunch of cocky d**ks until i realized you get the same kind of people no matter what brand of car they own..
of course if somebody has a competitve edge or knowledge that no one else has their going to be tight lipped..the L92 deal is still fairly new and not everybody as it figured out like,say, an LS1,SBC or even a SBF that's been around forever..
no it's not rocket science ..the biggest difference IMO is that big intake valve along with it's higher low lift flow #s..it's a lot more prone to reversion than a 241/243,etc. head...there is more info out there than you think,a lot of it isn't on the 'net,by the way..

 

230 240 is a general cammed specced for these that gives the same results. They seam to hang on when u retard the cam more to make the ICL later. So if its 114+4 try 114+0 it may not change the low end but make it hang on. Again it could possibly be the intake valve starting to float, Going to a slightly less lift valve with less aggressive ramp can help this. I have seen a lot of the bigger stuff nose over and smaller stuff hang on I usually found installing them straight up or even retarded slightly helped them produce power later and didn't appear to change the drivability. Some 224/228 cams I have found rev harder then a 232 234 112, I'm not sure if its the overlap hindering the topend but retarding that cam seams to fix the issue also. It possibly reduces reversion with a later IVO. But more tech heads could chime in here. To much overlap they dont really appear to like either.

I think what Paul(SS Enforcer) said to is right look at those cams tested there all similiar, In saying that there all big splits too, I would have like to see the smaller split stuff more in there just to see if there is really much difference in a real world shootout. What is interesting, is that there is differences in power output by as much as 20hp with similiar cams. The Lunati cam with .577" lift is making the best power, its lift is moderate compared to others but its ex duration is huge at 248 deg! Its real spec is a 233 248 114. For one to go out and think a comp 236xfi lobe with same ex will beat it. I am not so sure, I would rather buy the proven camshaft.

There is also a big trend in US keeping intake relatively small, like 224 or 228 and running massive lift and then generous ex duration. Like 229 240 .660 lift or 224 .640 lift with huge 248 on 6L. I have never tried them so cannot comment, But keeping to around 22x duration on intake definately is whats required to have huge area under the curve. However I would like to see one work in a 364 or LS3. The futral is around the 224 238 mark on 113 with .620 odd lift and has 10 foot pound at 3000 rpm more then the lunati and 20 hp down up top to the lunati, I wonder how the futral would go with more ex duration. Overall the lunati is very good down low considering, its lobes must have a lot to do with that.!!

 

Here's a typical Aussie bloke doing what he does best. Following KISS technology. Stop giving away your secrets Paul.

 

It's not so difficult to understand Joel, the baby Hotcam virtually wins the race to 5000 rpm http://www.gmhightechperformance.com.../photo_11.html

But have a look at what cams are very close to it in that HP range 111.6 lsa COMP cams 225 233 with over 600 lift and the Lingenfelter and Thunder Racing cams on 117 lsa's 215 dur and 628 lift on the intake. So for mine if your not after a max effort the Hotcam has to be considered as a good cam for a daily driver that won't belt your valve train around. The tight lsa cams will drop off a bit earlier but who cares on streeter. A stalled auto is a different matter altogether.

Were going to see how a 218 228 Xe lobed 112+0 runs in a 416 ls3 stroker m6 with well ported L92's in about 6 weeks arn't we Joel.


cheers

 

I wonder how the little JT cam will work in a Darton sleeved 427?

I'll let you know next month.

 

ok so who has the CORRECT info then? i just wanna see some simillar setups like mine making good power and find out who helped them pick the right cam? i really cant beleive how hard this has been!

 

Cool. You'll probably need sticker tires.

Jon

 

it was a lot harder 2 yrs ago...New Era and Va Speed are a couple sponsors on here that come to mind that could help you meet your goals..
have you been paying attention to this thread?there's some good info on here,IMO..

 

Run the cam I used in my 6.0 L VE/G8 then 224 228 xer 114+2 it pulled until 6500 and pushed a 4000lb car down the 1/4 at 119 mph on pump fuel with a crappy 6l80e. Anyone else got a G8 to run 11.8 without spraying it and on a stock stall ?

Or maybe you think there is some really secret grind that no one is releasing to the public. Take the previous posters advice and read this thread and look at the GM comparo. Guys are trying different things but it doesn't allways mean it's going to be better.

The Lingenfelter cam looks very good especially if you want to spray it.

cheers

 

That cam looks a lot like the lunati cam its 233/248/114 but only has .577" lift it took out the shootout for best power. I wish there were some bigger single patterns in there that were tested to clear up that theory! Also makes you wonder how a cam with -11(and a 215 lobe!) overlap is only 20 hp shy of a 12 deg overlap cam with a 234 intake lobe! Makes you wonder the overlap doesn't cater for much. a low 230s single pattern with wide lsa may have outpeformed.

 

I know, I wrote it

 

How dare you question the almighty SPIN!! Blaspheme I say! I demand you to go and fast in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights and then come back and beg for his forgiveness.

 

In all fairness though he has some great points and data to back it up. He and I have had many heated discussions over the years (like many others have) about cams, and he is starting to sway me to his way of thinking about cam design, and I have done a lot of research that backs up his thinking. However, he thinks his way is the only way and doesn't always seem to understand that some guys just want a nice mild cam that doesnt' lobe to much are very little at all.

When you study the GM Tech article and throughout the 2 big Livernois and Lunati cams (which performed terrible below 6k rpm) all the cams are within 10 - 15 hp of one another and a lot of it comes down to what you are looking for in a cam and where it makes power. I am very big on power, specially tq, under the curve, and his 228/232 has shown that it makes more tq. at 3k rpm than a 224 cam which did surprise me. It seems to be the sweet spot of intake duration, however I plan to go with XFI lobes for a little more tq. and bump up the CR to 11.5:1 on a 116 + 2 LSA. Can't wait for next year to try it!